Talk:Hearne Academy

AFC Comments

it's become rather common to comment even before submission for the guidance of the editor. I've not usually done so before, but it seems a better way than to put comments on te talk page where they will be less visible.

I am very eager to get articles on less represented groups -- I am in particular very eager to get 19th century educational institutions of this sort. In doing it, we should try to do more than a directory entry. I'm not one of those who think we need a complete Good Article, but neither do I think we should do the mere sub-stubs you have sometimes done, and I thin the consensus agrees with me on this. There are some who have been skeptical about even retaining such articles, and they are best deterred by having it reasonably substantial from the start. What I'd really like to see is a search for notable or potentially notable alumni. And btw, it helps very much the people doing wikidata if you can add an ISBN or OCLC or other identifier. That's the best way to gradually build up the coverage. DGG ( talk ) 04:57, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

I don't think I had submitted this entry yet? The handbook writeup is encyclopedic entry from the Texas State Historical Association. I've added some additional coverage. Wikipedians have long been reluctant to include subjects related to African American and African history, but we can do better. Draft:Journey of an African Colony also languishes in draftspace. These examples are something we should all be embarassed about. Why is it always a fight to get articles like Oberlin Academy included? You can put the blame on me for having the audacity to add them and not being more perfect, but I see single sourced additions gliding on in all the time. And I will never be ashamed about adding notable subjects even if many Wikipedians find it easier to make excuses for exclusion. FloridaArmy (talk) 18:39, 4 January 2021 (UTC